Read this and thought of everyone here.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Read this and thought of everyone here.

    http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/43262-THNcom-Top-10-Worst-NHL-cliches.html
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Read this and though of everyone here.

    I'm guilty of using #6 a lot.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    Looks like Kessel is No. 1 in something.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    lol
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    Proteau is a dirtbag.  He's the one who wrote that we should feel sorry for Cooke because of all the negative attention he's getting.

    ___

    I hate ALL cliches.  A word gets in the minds of people and it takes years to come out.  Dirty areas, vulnerable minute, triangles, layers, blah blah blah blah.  It makes listening to hockey next to impossible for me.

    Fortunately for all on Earth, last year's big one, puck moving defenseman, has seemingly disappeared.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from callodthedom19. Show callodthedom19's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    In Response to Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.:
    [QUOTE]Proteau is a dirtbag.  He's the one who wrote that we should feel sorry for Cooke because of all the negative attention he's getting. ___ I hate ALL cliches.  A word gets in the minds of people and it takes years to come out.  Dirty areas, vulnerable minute, triangles, layers, blah blah blah blah.  It makes listening to hockey next to impossible for me. Fortunately for all on Earth, last year's big one, puck moving defenseman, has seemingly disappeared.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]
    Proteau is a real p.o.s.. I knew you'd be all over this one and I agree, it's really annoying to hear these used game after game and in pre and post game discussion.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    Made me think of Crash Davis and Nuke LaLoosh.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    Well, like I said — moving forward, at the end of the day it is what it is.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    1 and 5 are Belchickisms that have filtered into the mindless world of media types.  That fact makes Belchick a manipulator of the media.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    In Response to Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.:
    [QUOTE]Proteau is a dirtbag.  He's the one who wrote that we should feel sorry for Cooke because of all the negative attention he's getting. ___ I hate ALL cliches.  A word gets in the minds of people and it takes years to come out.  Dirty areas, vulnerable minute, triangles, layers, blah blah blah blah.  It makes listening to hockey next to impossible for me. Fortunately for all on Earth, last year's big one, puck moving defenseman, has seemingly disappeared.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    strong on the stick
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from orr4neely8. Show orr4neely8's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    Number 9 is my most common didn't play a full 60 mins.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from bogie6. Show bogie6's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    as posted above, Proteau is a nebbish. Continues to create absolute rubbish as fact. THN could use more than one replacement.
     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from jalvis. Show jalvis's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    In Response to Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.:
    [QUOTE]1 and 5 are Belchickisms that have filtered into the mindless world of media types.  That fact makes Belchick a manipulator of the media.
    Posted by islamorada[/QUOTE]

    100% agree.  And when they lose he might throw #9 out there as well.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from jalvis. Show jalvis's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    In Response to Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.:
    [QUOTE]Belichick needs #1 copyrighted with royalties to follow.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]

    I hope not!  For the amount of times that I use that in a given week I'd be broke!
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from I-Like-Hockey. Show I-Like-Hockey's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    Actually after the first two points I thought that article was awful. Not funny or creative really in any sense.

    Also the writer is a #%@#%@
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    In Response to Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.:
    [QUOTE]Actually after the first two points I thought that article was awful. Not funny or creative really in any sense. Also the writer is a #%@#%@
    Posted by I-Like-Hockey[/QUOTE]
    I'm just shocked that he doesn't know that an assist-notcher's goal is one where he tries to thread a pass through the defense and crease but instead it bounces off of a defender and past the goalie.
     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from scooter244. Show scooter244's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    The Bruins are the worst offenders of the "obviously" one. Watch any Chara interview and it's every second word. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from john6345. Show john6345's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    I think most of these are created by sports media coaches who teach these stupid phrases.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    Not to over-think this, but almost every one of those cliches has a logic to it that comes out of typical context in which athletes and coaches speak.  A lot of them are idiotic because they're responding to idiotic questions, and if you point out the question is idiotic, you end up on a top ten like Dennis Green, Jim Mora, Allen Iverson and most recently Michael Vick.

    It's a routinely accepted concept in sports that champions go beyond the limits of their endurance/talent/pain threshold.  Isn't that basically what "giving 110%" means - exceeding what is logically possible?  So this is shorthand, and not bad shorthand really, for going beyond what's normally possible.

    A two goal lead might easily be harder to protect - not erase - than a one goal lead.  Teams play differently when the margin is larger.  A team that is down two opens up, takes chances.  A team up two might get overly cautious, stop applying pressure...I mean, the reasoning behind this one - whether it's true or not - is obvious.

    90% of the time, when players say "obviously" or, my personal favorite, "no question" it's because the answer to some reporter's stupid question is obvious (basically by design - they know what answer they need to complete the story to deadline) even to the point where it's not really a question.  It's a cue card.

    Goal scorer's goal is easy enough to understand, isn't it?  It's the kind of goal only those gifted enough to be called natural goal scorers typically score?  This just seems like Proteau's being willfully stupid.  And I can easily see a coach's goal and a defensive defenseman's goal.  A coach's goal is when players execute a smartly designed play right out of a timeout - see the Recchi goal in the playoffs against Buffalo two years ago that tied the game late.  A DD's goal is a guy who holds the puck in at the blue line and flips a wrister in the direction of the net that pinballs off of the defenseman in front before going in.

    I could go on, but why.  This was an attempt at an easy column that shows how little thinking Proteau can do.  In fact, isn't moaning about this stuff itself a cliche?
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    In Response to Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.:
    [QUOTE]Not to over-think this, but almost every one of those cliches has a logic to it that comes out of typical context in which athletes and coaches speak.  A lot of them are idiotic because they're responding to idiotic questions, and if you point out the question is idiotic, you end up on a top ten like Dennis Green, Jim Mora, Allen Iverson and most recently Michael Vick. It's a routinely accepted concept in sports that champions go beyond the limits of their endurance/talent/pain threshold.  Isn't that basically what "giving 110%" means - exceeding what is logically possible?  So this is shorthand, and not bad shorthand really, for going beyond what's normally possible. A two goal lead might easily be harder to protect - not erase - than a one goal lead.  Teams play differently when the margin is larger.  A team that is down two opens up, takes chances.  A team up two might get overly cautious, stop applying pressure...I mean, the reasoning behind this one - whether it's true or not - is obvious. 90% of the time, when players say "obviously" or, my personal favorite, "no question" it's because the answer to some reporter's stupid question is obvious (basically by design - they know what answer they need to complete the story to deadline) even to the point where it's not really a question.  It's a cue card. Goal scorer's goal is easy enough to understand, isn't it?  It's the kind of goal only those gifted enough to be called natural goal scorers typically score?  This just seems like Proteau's being willfully stupid.  And I can easily see a coach's goal and a defensive defenseman's goal.  A coach's goal is when players execute a smartly designed play right out of a timeout - see the Recchi goal in the playoffs against Buffalo two years ago that tied the game late.  A DD's goal is a guy who holds the puck in at the blue line and flips a wrister in the direction of the net that pinballs off of the defenseman in front before going in. I could go on, but why.  This was an attempt at an easy column that shows how little thinking Proteau can do.  In fact, isn't moaning about this stuff itself a cliche?
    Posted by Bookboy007[/QUOTE]
    Thank you for reading my mind. It's foolish that he gets paid to write that crap.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Read this and thought of everyone here.

    Another definition of what that means is in a song written by John Barlow, former lyricist for the Grateful Dead. His song is titled, It Is What It is. Some sample lyrics:

    "If you need an explanation, there's a quick and easy answer

    Stop thinking for a moment and give this one a try

    'Cause it is what it is, what it is, what it is, what it is."

     

Share